Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2015 DIGILAW 1147 (ALL)

Vijay Kumar Singh Visen [U/A 227] v. Pradeep Kumar Singh Visen

2015-05-08

ANIL KUMAR

body2015
JUDGMENT Anil Kumar, J. Heard Shri Rama Shanker Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the record. 2. As the controversy involved in the present case is trivial in nature, so notices to opposite party nos.1 to 5 are dispensed with. 3. Shri Rama Shanker Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has filed a suit for cancellation of Will deed and permanent injunction registered as Regular Suit No.2567/2014 (Vijay Kumar Singh Visen vs. Pradeep Kumar Singh Visen & Ors.) in the Court of Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Court No.22, Lucknow In the said matter, an application for grant of temporary injunction under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 C.P.C. has been moved. On the said application, the trial Court had issued notices to the respondents to file objection. 4. It is further submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that in spite of the services of the notices, till date, no response has been filed by the respondents/defendants and the application for grant of temporary injunction under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 C.P.C. could not be decided due to lingering attitude adopted by the contesting respondents without any fault on the part of the petitioner. 5. He further submits that on the one hand, an application under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 CPC has not been decided and the same is pending before the trial court due to lingering attitude adopted by the contesting respondents and on the other hand, they are trying to change the nature of the property subject matter of the suit. So, the petitioner moved an application under Order 8 Rule 10 C.P.C. and the same is also pending. Keeping in view the above said facts, a prayer has been made by learned counsel for the petitioner that the trial court may be directed to decide the application for grant of temporary injunction under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 C.P.C. on the date fixed i.e. 22.05.2015 and if not possible, the same may be decided within time frame fix by this Court. 6. 6. After hearing learned counsel for the parties who are present today and going through the records as well as taking into consideration the prayer made by the petitioner which is innocuous in nature, the interest of justice will sub serve if a direction is issued to the trial court to decide the application for grant of temporary injunction under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 C.P.C. expeditiously. 7. For the foregoing reasons, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the trial court/Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Court No.22, Lucknow to make all endeavour to decide an application for grant of temporary injunction under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 C.P.C. filed in Regular Suit No.2567/2014 (Vijay Kumar Singh Visen vs. Pradeep Kumar Singh Visen & Ors.) on the date fixed i.e. 22.05.2015 after hearing the parties concerned in accordance with law and if not possible, then by 30.05.2015. 8. It is clarified that this Court has not adjudicated the claim of the petitioner on merit.